0
stratostar

Longmont City Council will take up skydiving noise

Recommended Posts

Boomerdog

I note with some amusement page 12, the phrase "....facially erroneous..." So when the case may be weak, bolster the brief with esoteric adjectives. What a whopper.



They are really grasping at straws, it's comical.

Kimmie.... SHUT... THE... FUCK... UP!!! God... I just want to slap the shit out of you. :S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GoneCodFishing



P.s. Impressed that someone made it reading all the way to page 12!



Indeed!
I've read all the previous ones, but I'm so tired of reading the same old BS over, and over again, that I haven't even looked beyond the 2nd page yet.:S
"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
normiss

"The Court erred in finding that Plaintiffs’ claim for
unjust enrichment was substantially frivolous or groundless Mile-
Hi may disagree on how the terms “benefit” or “unjust” should be interpreted, but Citizens’ position is clearly rational. Therefore, the claim was not frivolous"
:S
Their attorney gets some good weed.



Perhaps. More likely that the lawyers are basically doing what their client (and it's probably only one at this point) wants. She dictates what she thinks their position should be, the lawyers translate it into "legalese."

They aren't doing this on contingency (no fee unless they win). They are getting paid for every word, punctuation mark and even space.

I mentioned this before. Are they simply doing it for the money? Are they being buffaloed and bulldozered by their client? Is there some sort of "favor" they owe "someone" that they are continuing this case this far?

No clue. But I can't see this appeal going anywhere. The trial judge gave CQS every possible break, and in the end, gave them zero. There weren't any substantial errors in the case, there is virtually no chance of any of the elements being reversed.

I'm not a lawyer, but I have a reasonable familiarity with it. Far more on the criminal law side than civil, but enough to see how futile this appeal is.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

"....facially erroneous..."


mirage62

So for our lawyers out there....what does this mean?


I think they were trying to use fancy language to say "on the face of it", or in other words, obviously erroneous.

Lawyers get paid hundreds of dollars per hour to use words like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Naw, I think they're calling either the DZ's lawyer, the DZO, or the judge (or all three) ugly. They're just hoping that the judge will think it's a typo :P

Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mirage62

So for our lawyers out there....what does this mean?



As Refugio suggested, the lawyer probably meant prima facie but the weed was too good so it came out a bit different.

prima facie

: (pry-mah fay-shah) adj. Latin for "at first look," or "on its face," referring to a lawsuit or criminal prosecution in which the evidence before trial is sufficient to prove the case unless there is substantial contradictory evidence presented at trial. A prima facie case presented to a Grand Jury by the prosecution will result in an indictment. Example: in a charge of bad check writing, evidence of a half dozen checks written on a non-existent bank account makes it a prima facie case. However, proof that the bank had misprinted the account number on the checks might disprove the prosecution's apparent "open and shut" case.
Always remember the danger.

Never forget the fun!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In the "Statement of Facts" I was looking for a particular "fact": (evidence produced in the case by expert testimony). What I was looking for was evidence that there was in fact - excessive noise. The gravamen of the Plaintiff's case. (Gravamen= the material part of a grievance)

Since I only attended two days of the trial, I was very interested in reading the Appellant's Statement of Facts to find evidence of excessive noise. There was wordsmithed verbiage about 65 decibels and whether it was even a standard. There was a statement that the Purple Otter "could" produce 80 db's, yadda yadda, but nothing approaching what a trial judge would be considering to determine whether the Plaintiff's noise complaint was a valid claim. For the Plaintiff's case to be successful, I would have expected the following 1,2,3 to have been presented:
"1. The decibel limit for noise considered to be a violation/ nuisance is 65.
2. The Defendant's aircraft exceeded the 65 db
3. Therefore our complaint is valid and justiciable."

(In cases where a fact is not measurable, well, I get that) But, noise is measurable with a decibel meter - you either have it or you don't. Evidence of any other sort, such as "It bothers me", etc is simply a subjective statement, and the level of irritating noise, or the irritating nature of a type of noise varies from individual to individual. I don't even get, from reading the statement of facts, that there was even an applicable decibel standard. If there was such a standard, it doesn't appear that the Plaintiff's established it. "Plain reasoning thinking" says you can't win (or lose) a race without knowing where the finishing line is. At least that's how I view this brief.

In short; From my reading of the Appellant's own statement of facts, the burden of proof for a nuisance lawsuit was not been met. I believe the trial court found that too.

A perceptive and intelligent reader of this appeal brief, (And I fully believe the Court of Appeals persons are both perceptive and intelligent) in my opinion, should summarily reject the Appellant's contentions because of the Plaintiff's failure to carry the burden of proof. Further, since that minimal burden wasn't met, all of the damages awarded should be valid too. I get all of that from simply reading this brief and seeing their arguments. Keep in mind, all appeals courts rule, based upon the record. They are free of the drama's and emotions etc. that are necessarily part of the case before the original trier of fact. Hopefully I am correct on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"To be clear, Mile-Hi operates a local recreation business; a carnival ride that
happen to utilize airplanes. There is no reason why a local government should be
prevented from regulating or controlling this local business."

I made it to page 14. When I read this I started laughing out loud. Did you know the FAA now has Part 1100 that governs roller coasters and Part 1101 that governs dunking booths?:P

This is directly from the FAA Advisory Circular 150/190-7
Titled;
Minimum Standards for Commercial Aeronautical Activities.

f. Skydiving. Skydiving is an aeronautical activity. Any restriction, limitation, or ban on skydiving
on the airport must be based on the grant assurance that provides that the airport sponsor may prohibit
or limit aeronautical use for the safe operation of the airport (subject to FAA approval). The following
questions present reasonable factors the sponsor might contemplate when developing minimum
standards that apply to skydiving:
(1) Will this activity present or create a safety hazard to the normal operations of aircraft
arriving or departing from the airport? If so, has the local Airports District Office (ADO) or
the Regional Airports Office been contacted and have those FAA offices sought the
assistance from FAA Flight Standards (FS) and Air Traffic (AT) to assess whether safe
airport operations would be jeopardized?
(2) Can skydiving operations be safely accommodated at the airport? Can a drop zone be
safely established within the boundaries of the airport? Is guidance in FAA AC-90-66A
Recommended Standards Traffic Patterns and Practices for Aeronautical Operations at
Airports Without Operating Control Towers, 14 CFR Part 105 and United States Parachute
Association’s (USPA) Basic Safety Requirements being followed?
(3) What reasonable time periods can be designated for jumping in a manner consistent
with Part 105? What experience requirements are needed for an on-airport drop zone?
(4) What is a reasonable fee that the jumpers and/or their organizations can pay for the
privilege of using airport property?
(5) Has the relevant air traffic control facility been advised of the proposed parachute
operation? Does the air traffic control facility have concerns about the efficiency and utility
of the airport and its related instrument procedures?
(6) Will it be necessary to determine the impact of the proposed activity on the efficiency
and utility of the airport, related instrument approaches or nearby Instrument Flight Rules
(IFR)? If so, has FAA Air Traffic reviewed the matter and issued a finding?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Funnily enough, a friend of mine works at Neon, which operates an otter out of the Boulder airport for atmospheric air sampling. They fly long hours in standard patterns around here, and some of the complaints in the suit about behaviors the Mile Hi pilots denied engaging in sound pretty similar to Neon's patterns. It would be funny if they were complaining about the wrong otter, all along.
I'm trying to teach myself how to set things on fire with my mind. Hey... is it hot in here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FlyingRhenquest

Funnily enough, a friend of mine works at Neon, which operates an otter out of the Boulder airport for atmospheric air sampling. They fly long hours in standard patterns around here, and some of the complaints in the suit about behaviors the Mile Hi pilots denied engaging in sound pretty similar to Neon's patterns. It would be funny if they were complaining about the wrong otter, all along.



Well, if CQS didn't know about it before, they certainly learned about it at trial.
The MHS attorney asked every CQS witness if they knew about it, during cross-examinations.
"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FlyingRhenquest

Funnily enough, a friend of mine works at Neon, which operates an otter out of the Boulder airport for atmospheric air sampling. They fly long hours in standard patterns around here, and some of the complaints in the suit about behaviors the Mile Hi pilots denied engaging in sound pretty similar to Neon's patterns. It would be funny if they were complaining about the wrong otter, all along.



This is a copy of the email Queen retard Kimmie sent out Sunday!
***The second email below the divider line is the previous email she sent out Saturday. The attachment is a screenshot of my inbox so y'all can see the timestamps of those emails.
So it appears that she's going to try to close the airport now! LMAO!!!! :D:D:D



Good Neighbor Mile-Hi Skydiving

Yes, GOOD NEIGHBOR Mile-Hi Skydiving is conducting night jumps yet again this evening.
It's 10:00 and they just rounded the corner headed for the airport.

Their conduct this weekend is unacceptable. Please take a moment to email city council and staff. Tell them to rein in Mile-Hi Skydiving, and if you are a city of Longmont resident please be sure to include your address in your email.

Longmont city official emails:
Harold Dominguez ;
Polly Christensen ;
Gabe Santos ;
Dennis Coombs ;
Bonnie Finley ;
Brian Bagley ;
Jeff Moore ;
Joan Peck ;
David Slayter ;

Many thanks,
Kimberly Gibbs
Chairman and Founder, Citizens For Quiet Skies
Boulder County, Colorado
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
***Email from Saturday***

It is 10:30 pm and Mile-Hi Skydiving is STILL Operating

So much for Mile-Hi Skydiving being a "good neighbor." After a full day of listening to the obnoxious purple Twin Otter, we are now being further subjected to a nighttime full of more skydiving noise. It is 10:30 pm and they are still going. Any bets on whether they go until midnight again?

This is unacceptable. Tell City Council that this is ENOUGH. If they can't fine a way to rein in Mile-Hi Skydiving then the airport must be closed.

Longmont city official emails:
Harold Dominguez ;
Polly Christensen ;
Gabe Santos ;
Dennis Coombs ;
Bonnie Finley ;
Brian Bagley ;
Jeff Moore ;
Joan Peck ;
David Slayter ;

Many thanks,
Kimberly Gibbs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jumpdude

Yes, GOOD NEIGHBOR Mile-Hi Skydiving is conducting night jumps yet again this evening... This is unacceptable. Tell City Council that this is ENOUGH. If they can't fine a way to rein in Mile-Hi Skydiving then the airport must be closed.


I wonder if she sent in complaints about all the Independence Day fireworks noise? What about New Year's celebration noise? That's twice a year, probably about the same number of times per year that Mile High conducts night jumps.

Since sunset is about 8:30, and night jump certification requires that they be done an hour after sunset, then 10:30 isn't all that "late".

I wonder how many of those city council members have an e-mail filter that blocks or ignores Kimmie's e-mails?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cool, perhaps we could all write them and see if there's something that could be done about the skydiving noise coming out of Kim Gibbs' mouth. Maybe they can declare the city a crazy-person-free-zone or something.
I'm trying to teach myself how to set things on fire with my mind. Hey... is it hot in here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, GOOD NEIGHBOR Mile-Hi Skydiving is conducting night jumps yet again this evening.
It's 10:00 and they just rounded the corner headed for the airport.

Their conduct this weekend is unacceptable.

It is 10:30 pm and Mile-Hi Skydiving is STILL Operating

So much for Mile-Hi Skydiving being a "good neighbor." After a full day of listening to the obnoxious purple Twin Otter, we are now being further subjected to a nighttime full of more skydiving noise. It is 10:30 pm and they are still going. Any bets on whether they go until midnight again?

This is unacceptable.


Haha! Well, I was one of the skydivers jumping. I'm glad I could make her night. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Haha! Well, I was one of the skydivers jumping. I'm glad I could make her night.



Are you talking about last Saturday? July 2nd? There was no moon that night, that's all wrong!
Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FlyingRhenquest

Cool, perhaps we could all write them and see if there's something that could be done about the skydiving noise coming out of Kim Gibbs' mouth. Maybe they can declare the city a crazy-person-free-zone or something.



Has anyone considered a lawsuit against Mr Kimmie for shirking his marital duties and creating a public nuisance???... I mean seriously... Kimmie is screaming for some attention there Mr Kimmie.

FFS man... do your job

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Mike hi skydiving for providing me a lift during my visit this weekend. I was more then thrilled to have that south to north jump run, and I love the new bumper stickers I got at the dz. I love airplane noise! Looking forward to visiting again, sorry I could not stay longer then a few hours, but I was busy spending my additional tourist dollars all over the front range and in Estes.

P.S. Kim Gibbs, your house looks kind of dumpy from the air, and you need to mow the grass. Just saying.
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amazon

***Cool, perhaps we could all write them and see if there's something that could be done about the skydiving noise coming out of Kim Gibbs' mouth. Maybe they can declare the city a crazy-person-free-zone or something.



Has anyone considered a lawsuit against Mr Kimmie for shirking his marital duties and creating a public nuisance???... I mean seriously... Kimmie is screaming for some attention there Mr Kimmie.

FFS man... do your job

Should include some BDSM with a ball gag in her mouth, just saying. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nolhtairt

******Cool, perhaps we could all write them and see if there's something that could be done about the skydiving noise coming out of Kim Gibbs' mouth. Maybe they can declare the city a crazy-person-free-zone or something.



Has anyone considered a lawsuit against Mr Kimmie for shirking his marital duties and creating a public nuisance???... I mean seriously... Kimmie is screaming for some attention there Mr Kimmie.

FFS man... do your job

Should include some BDSM with a ball gag in her mouth, just saying. :P

Where's the like button? ;););)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jumpdude

***Funnily enough, a friend of mine works at Neon, which operates an otter out of the Boulder airport for atmospheric air sampling. They fly long hours in standard patterns around here, and some of the complaints in the suit about behaviors the Mile Hi pilots denied engaging in sound pretty similar to Neon's patterns. It would be funny if they were complaining about the wrong otter, all along.



This is a copy of the email Queen retard Kimmie sent out Sunday!
***The second email below the divider line is the previous email she sent out Saturday. The attachment is a screenshot of my inbox so y'all can see the timestamps of those emails.
So it appears that she's going to try to close the airport now! LMAO!!!! :D:D:D



Good Neighbor Mile-Hi Skydiving

Yes, GOOD NEIGHBOR Mile-Hi Skydiving is conducting night jumps yet again this evening.
It's 10:00 and they just rounded the corner headed for the airport.

Their conduct this weekend is unacceptable. Please take a moment to email city council and staff. Tell them to rein in Mile-Hi Skydiving, and if you are a city of Longmont resident please be sure to include your address in your email.

Longmont city official emails:
Harold Dominguez ;
Polly Christensen ;
Gabe Santos ;
Dennis Coombs ;
Bonnie Finley ;
Brian Bagley ;
Jeff Moore ;
Joan Peck ;
David Slayter ;

Many thanks,
Kimberly Gibbs
Chairman and Founder, Citizens For Quiet Skies
Boulder County, Colorado
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
***Email from Saturday***

It is 10:30 pm and Mile-Hi Skydiving is STILL Operating

So much for Mile-Hi Skydiving being a "good neighbor." After a full day of listening to the obnoxious purple Twin Otter, we are now being further subjected to a nighttime full of more skydiving noise. It is 10:30 pm and they are still going. Any bets on whether they go until midnight again?

This is unacceptable. Tell City Council that this is ENOUGH. If they can't fine a way to rein in Mile-Hi Skydiving then the airport must be closed.

Longmont city official emails:
Harold Dominguez ;
Polly Christensen ;
Gabe Santos ;
Dennis Coombs ;
Bonnie Finley ;
Brian Bagley ;
Jeff Moore ;
Joan Peck ;
David Slayter ;

Many thanks,
Kimberly Gibbs

Seems to me this is in direct violation of the judges order to get along.

Maybe someone should cc the judge.

top
Jump more, post less!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0